Case 4102651/2023 · Employment Tribunal
EMPLOYMENT TRIBUNALS (SCOTLAND) Case No: 4102651/2023 Mrs G Decu v White Hackle Ltd — 2023
- Case reference
- 4102651/2023
- Decision date
- 9 June 2023
- Jurisdiction
- Scotland
- Judge
- Employment Judge M Kearns Date
Parties
2 namedClaimant
EMPLOYMENT TRIBUNALS (SCOTLAND) Case No: 4102651/2023 Mrs G Decu
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThis was a Rule 21 judgment after no response was presented to the claim. On the available material, Employment Judge M Kearns found that White Hackle 3 Ltd had made an unauthorised deduction from Mrs G Decu's wages. The tribunal ordered payment of £984, made up of £624 for the period 5-11 December 2022 and £360 for the period 20-26 March 2023.
The tribunal also found that the respondent had failed to pay the claimant's holiday entitlement. It ordered payment of £781.20, calculated as 65.1 hours at £12 per hour. The hearing listed for 20 June 2023 was cancelled. The judgment therefore records total awards of £984 and £781.20, giving a combined total of £1,765.20.
Claims and outcomes
2 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unlawful deduction from wages | The tribunal, deciding the claim on the available material under Rule 21 because no response was presented, found an unauthorised deduction from wages for the periods 5-11 December 2022 and 20-26 March 2023. | Upheld | — | £984 |
| Holiday pay | The tribunal found that the respondent failed to pay the claimant's holiday entitlement and ordered payment for 65.1 hours at £12 per hour. | Upheld | — | £781 |
Remedy
Monetary award- Total award
- £1,765
- across all upheld claims
Legal tests applied
1 reference- Rule 21 of the Employment Tribunal Rules of Procedure 2013
Official outcome judgment PDF
Gov.uk primary recordThe official judgment PDF on gov.uk contains the tribunal's outcome, reasoning, and any remedy details. Where this page does not yet show extracted outcomes for every claim, use the PDF as the authoritative source.
Published on gov.uk under the Open Government Licence v3.0.
How we got this data
Case essentials (reference, date, judge, venue, country, claim categories) are extracted from the structured metadata gov.uk publishes alongside each decision. Parties and monetary figures are extracted from the judgment PDF text. Key findings and per-claim outcomes require a second extraction pass that is not yet complete for this case — until then, the primary source linked above is the authoritative record. See full methodology.
Named in this case and want it removed? Submit a takedown request. The page will be withdrawn on receipt and the editor will follow up within five working days.